News

Sea defences concern as council shifts sand

COUNCIL contractors caused concern when they began shifting sand on Shoebury Common beach, prompting fears the work may weaken the natural sea defence.

Diggers spent most of yesterday flattening the beach by removing sand near to where huge waves crashed over beach huts during Saturday’s high tide, which was so severe it caused a newvalve in a pipe to snap, flooding inland at Shoebury Common Road.

Despite council assurances the sand is not being removed from the beach, the Friends of Shoebury Common have raised their concerns about the particularly vulnerable part of the beach.

Ray Bailey said: ”If this work weakens the defences at all this is wrong. The beach is needed to help protect the existing seawall and if sand is taken away from Shoebury Common, like the council tried to do last year to build up other beaches to the west, they are intentionally leaving it unprotected.”

The work is being carried out at the site where Southend Council wants to build a £4.6million, two-metre high sea wall using mud from Southend’s Cliff Gardens.

Peter Grubb, fellow member and owner of Uncle Tom’s Cabin on the common, added: “The only reason the sea wall at Shoebury Common hasn’t overtopped when we’ve had bad weather recently is because of the amount of sand on the beach.

It takes the energy of the waves.

“Any removal would be a deliberate attempt by the council to undermine the current defences and justify the need for the seawall it wants.”

A spokesman for Southend Council said: “No sand is being removed from Shoebury Common. It is simply being recycled from where it builds up back to where it was eroded from.”

Council leader Nigel Holdcroft said: “We are fortunate the storms and tides have not combined to cause a major breach to our defences but next time we might not be so fortunate.”

The new sea wall will have its foundations dug soon, ideal time to use some of these aggregates for that, after all it's not the golden sand we all love on a hot day, more a sort of pea shingle

The new sea wall will have its foundations dug soon, ideal time to use some of these aggregates for that, after all it's not the golden sand we all love on a hot day, more a sort of pea shingleNowthatsworthknowing

Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?

Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?CouldntThinkOfOne

CouldntThinkOfOne wrote:
Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?

For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!!

I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here!

It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area.

I'm going to humour you a bit and answer "why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding.

Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out)

As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes & businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk.

From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.

[quote][p][bold]CouldntThinkOfOne[/bold] wrote:
Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?[/p][/quote]For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!!
I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here!
It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area.
I'm going to humour you a bit and answer "why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding.
Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out)
As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes & businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk.
From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.Russ13

CouldntThinkOfOne wrote: Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?

For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!! I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here! It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area. I'm going to humour you a bit and answer &quot;why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding. Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out) As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes &amp; businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk. From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.

Actually Russ, i take back what i said. I personally wouldn't like the sea wall to be built (personal opinion) but if it isn't there and shoeburyness does flood like you said, you will only get people writing to the echo saying why there was never a stronger sea defence put in when in fact it was proposed.

All im saying is i do not understand why Shoebury Common when all the housing behind the wall is 20foot above sea level.

[quote][p][bold]Russ13[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CouldntThinkOfOne[/bold] wrote: Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?[/p][/quote]For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!! I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here! It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area. I'm going to humour you a bit and answer "why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding. Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out) As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes & businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk. From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.[/p][/quote]Actually Russ, i take back what i said. I personally wouldn't like the sea wall to be built (personal opinion) but if it isn't there and shoeburyness does flood like you said, you will only get people writing to the echo saying why there was never a stronger sea defence put in when in fact it was proposed.
All im saying is i do not understand why Shoebury Common when all the housing behind the wall is 20foot above sea level.CouldntThinkOfOne

LastLaugh2 wrote:
Might impede upon the caravan site, so they must be careful of suffer the consequences.

What consequences might that be...dont you feel a little pathetic pretending to be someone else?

[quote][p][bold]LastLaugh2[/bold] wrote:
Might impede upon the caravan site, so they must be careful of suffer the consequences.[/p][/quote]What consequences might that be...dont you feel a little pathetic pretending to be someone else?LastLaugh,,,

CouldntThinkOfOne wrote: Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?

For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!! I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here! It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area. I'm going to humour you a bit and answer &quot;why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding. Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out) As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes &amp; businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk. From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.

Actually Russ, i take back what i said. I personally wouldn't like the sea wall to be built (personal opinion) but if it isn't there and shoeburyness does flood like you said, you will only get people writing to the echo saying why there was never a stronger sea defence put in when in fact it was proposed. All im saying is i do not understand why Shoebury Common when all the housing behind the wall is 20foot above sea level.

The issue isn't with the houses in the immediate vicinity......

Due to the relief of the area, if the sea defences are breached at Shoebury Common, Ness Road will act like a funnel and home & businesses along Ness Road and adjoining streets will be flooded. As I said before, predictions show that the flood water could reach the Fenchurch Street line.

During the floods in August, the junction of Ness Road and Campfield Road was under 1-2ft of water, that was only from heavy rain, tidal flooding would be a lot worse.

I do agree that Shoebury Common will be "spoilt" but it's a necessary evil. Perhaps there was similar upset when the prom, sea wall and Uncle Tom's Cabin were first built but everyone now accepts them as part of the fixtures & fittings.

If the area becomes prone to flooding, homes & businesses won't be able to get home insurance and eventually businesses will close/move away from the area, this won't be good for anyone in Shoebury.

[quote][p][bold]CouldntThinkOfOne[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Russ13[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CouldntThinkOfOne[/bold] wrote: Stating that its being recycled is a lie. The recent tides have unearthed parts of the beach people have never seen before and looking at the disabled ramp they places in the concrete foundations are now visable. So where has that sand gone then? the sand is being washed down east beach way and foulness. They are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes and get the wall over with. Why we need a higher see wall in shoebury i do not know. there are higher priority areas that require a higher sea wall than shoebury common. Like the new garrison builds for example?[/p][/quote]For crying out loud will you just listen to yourself for one moment!!! I know there are plenty of conspiracy theories but we're talking about sea defences here! It would be cheaper for the council to just dispose of the earth from the cliff slide than to use it to boulster sea defences in the area. I'm going to humour you a bit and answer "why we need a higher sea wall in Shoebury"....... Studies have shown that in the next 20 odd years, sea levels will rise a significant amount and the area will be at risk of flooding. Some 500+ homes would be in the firing line (and not those on the Garrision which seem to also come under some unfair criticism), not to mention the terminus of one of the busiest commuter train lines in the country (that's Shoebury station if you need it spelt out) As a resident of Shoebury and not likely to be directly affected by the potential flooding I do think it will spoil the area but everyone will get used to it over time. What people won't get used to is having their homes & businesses wrecked by flood water and then not being able to get insurance as the area will be deemed a flood risk. From what I've heard/seen, it would appear to be mainly the older residents in the area who are most up in arms about this, without wanting to sound disrespectful, most of whom may not be around when flooding becomes a risk so IMO it's quite a selfish attitude not to want to protect the local area for years to come and let people enjoy what is on the whole a lovely place to live for many more years to come.[/p][/quote]Actually Russ, i take back what i said. I personally wouldn't like the sea wall to be built (personal opinion) but if it isn't there and shoeburyness does flood like you said, you will only get people writing to the echo saying why there was never a stronger sea defence put in when in fact it was proposed. All im saying is i do not understand why Shoebury Common when all the housing behind the wall is 20foot above sea level.[/p][/quote]The issue isn't with the houses in the immediate vicinity......
Due to the relief of the area, if the sea defences are breached at Shoebury Common, Ness Road will act like a funnel and home & businesses along Ness Road and adjoining streets will be flooded. As I said before, predictions show that the flood water could reach the Fenchurch Street line.
During the floods in August, the junction of Ness Road and Campfield Road was under 1-2ft of water, that was only from heavy rain, tidal flooding would be a lot worse.
I do agree that Shoebury Common will be "spoilt" but it's a necessary evil. Perhaps there was similar upset when the prom, sea wall and Uncle Tom's Cabin were first built but everyone now accepts them as part of the fixtures & fittings.
If the area becomes prone to flooding, homes & businesses won't be able to get home insurance and eventually businesses will close/move away from the area, this won't be good for anyone in Shoebury.Russ13

Hang on.....the council are digging the sand out to replace sand that has been washed away elsewhere...erm. Pointless exercise as it will just be washed back again to this spot or out to sea and you have destroyed two defences. Nature will out!

Hang on.....the council are digging the sand out to replace sand that has been washed away elsewhere...erm. Pointless exercise as it will just be washed back again to this spot or out to sea and you have destroyed two defences. Nature will out!TherealIndiana